2008/5/24, Prashant Shah elite.mumbai@gmail.com:

...

Can we get BIS to back this appeal, considering it has voted no and raised concerns about the process?

Least one can do is email our own delegate requesting a formal complain.

Send your requests at

ird AT bis.org.in

Also pick up your phone and talk to them at +91 11 23 23 79 91

Honestly I found the text a little tough to read -

M'be the following looks better ( similar content ) ?

Considering that India has quite responsibly voted NO after considerable deliberation it was unfortunate that the standard was passed due to rather questionable efforts of vested commercial interests.

I request you to consider aiding and supporting South Africa's appeal against the Microsoft sponsored standard OOXML which raises valid questions on the credibility of the followed process with regards -

1. The last minute "stuffing" of committees by voters, mostly Microsoft partners 2. The outrageous discounting of questions raised by heads of committees of members countries. 3. The purposeful wrong recording of NO votes as YES votes.

Once again,I request you to aid South Africa's appeal in the interest of freedom of information so rightly upheld by India.

regards,

Chetan Shringarpure Mumbai 400081 Member,GNU/Linux Users Group of Bombay.

On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 6:18 PM, Easwar Hariharan meindian523@gmail.com wrote:

On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 3:08 PM, Praveen A pravi.a@gmail.com wrote:

...

2008/5/24, Prashant Shah elite.mumbai@gmail.com:

...

...

Can we get BIS to back this appeal, considering it has voted no and raised concerns about the process?

Least one can do is email our own delegate requesting a formal complain.

Send your requests at

ird AT bis.org.in

Also pick up your phone and talk to them at +91 11 23 23 79 91

I sent the below:

<mail> Sir, I appeal to you to consider aiding and supporting South Africa's appeal against the Microsoft sponsored standard OOXML considering that India has voted NO and raised many objections and the doubts raised about the credibility of the standardization process and allegations of manipulation of the national committees of various countries by last minute entries of voters,most of whom were Microsoft partners and voted Yes,also considering that some countries' committees' members have expressed surprise that even though the unanimous decision in the committee was to vote NO,but these have been registered as YES with the ISO. Once again,I appeal to you to aid South Africa's appeal in the interest of freedom of access to documentation.

Regards, Easwar Hariharan Mumbai 400080 Member,GNU/Linux Users Group of Bombay.

</mail>

Hope this helps people who would love to shoot off the mail but can't think of anything on the spot.And improvements and additions are always welcome.

Regards, Easwar -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers

On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 3:07 PM, Chetan S cshring@gmail.com wrote:

Logged my mail with BIS :)

Feels good ( do they read the mails ? )

regards, Chetan.

On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 3:01 PM, Chetan S cshring@gmail.com wrote:

...

Honestly I found the text a little tough to read -

M'be the following looks better ( similar content ) ?

Considering that India has quite responsibly voted NO after considerable deliberation it was unfortunate that the standard was passed due to

rather

...

questionable efforts of vested commercial interests.

I request you to consider aiding and supporting South Africa's appeal against the Microsoft sponsored standard OOXML which raises valid questions on the credibility of the followed process with regards -

1. The last minute "stuffing" of committees by voters, mostly Microsoft

partners

...

2. The outrageous discounting of questions raised by heads of committees

of members countries. 3. The purposeful wrong recording of NO votes as YES votes.

Once again,I request you to aid South Africa's appeal in the interest of freedom of information so rightly upheld by India.

regards,

Chetan Shringarpure Mumbai 400081 Member,GNU/Linux Users Group of Bombay.

You are in Mulund E,I guess.I deliberately avoided pointing fingers at M$ in the doubt(fear?) that they may dismiss it as another zealot mail.I was trying to sound sober and cool and calculated.Your letter doesn't sound bad either,maybe a mix of mine and yours could give just the right feel of "josh"+concern(sober and calculated).More comments please.

Regards, Easwar

This was the letter I sent.

Dear Sir,

I request you to consider supporting The South African Standards Body's (SABS) appeal against OOXML approval [1] by ISO/IEC considering the fact that we have decided not to approve it and we have raised concerns about effectiveness of the ballot resolution process [2]. This would help to bring back the lost credibility of ISO and standardisation process in general after the approval of OOXML.

A quote from the letter SABS submited highlights the issue clearly:

"We believe that there is an important question of principle involved and that the reputation of ISO/IEC is indeed at stake. There has been speculation about the need to revise the directives around fast track processing. While such revision might indeed be necessary, we cannot accept the outcome of a process in which the existing directives have not, in our opinion, been applied."

I hope we will support the courage and leadership shown by South Africa in standing up for the values that ISO stands for.

Regards Praveen Technology Consultant #91, 12th cross, 1st Main Bharathi Layout DRC Post SG Palya Bengaluru 560029

That's cool too.

Regards, Easwar

On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 4:30 PM, Praveen A pravi.a@gmail.com wrote:

2008/5/24 Praveen A pravi.a@gmail.com:

...

"The national body of South Africa (SABS), as a P member of JTC 1, hereby submits an appeal against the outcome of the fast track processing of DIS 29500 Office open XML.

Brazil followed South Africa in standing upto ISO sellout. http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080529202924937

I hope some more will follow. One quote from the letter, showing what happened at BRM as a clear picture.

"Brazil has tried to present this proposal, during the debates, on the first day of the meeting and, attending to a request made by the convenor, Brazil has taken offline discussions with USA and other delegations and prepared its proposal to be presented on Friday, during USA proposal presentation. On Friday, when USA ended their part of presentation and asked for Brazil to present its part of it, the convenor denied this opportunity to Brazilian delegation.

Several delegations has protested against that arbitrary decision, but those appeal was in vain and until the end of the BRM, the Brazilian delegation was not able to present its proposal. The main reason alleged by the convenor was "lack of time"."

And it seems our efforts bore fruit.India has filed an appeal too.Yoohoo!It's been put up as an update in the article mentioned by Praveen above.